433, Construct an attached garage, Staff Reports• •
C1i y 0/ RO//t'ng Jit'a
_ r
MEETING DATE: JULY 13, 1991
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
FAX: (213) 377-7288
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 433, MS. TERI MCCOY LEVINE
56 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 102-SK)
BACKGROUND
Attached is a request from Mr. Criss Gunderson for a one year time
extension for a Site Plan Review for a proposed residential
reconstruction on the subject site. Planning Commission Resolution
No. 90-18 was approved on August 4, 1990 for a proposed Site Plan.
Mr. Gunderson says that there have been problems with the bid
process and the selection of a contractor.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission review the case.
• •
CRISS C GUNDERSON: ARCHITECT
253 5TH STREET
SEAL BEACH, CA 90740
TEL (213) 594-9157
FAX (213) 594-5553
June 26, 1991
Chairman Allen Roberts
Rolling Hills Planning Commission
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California
Regarding: Levine residence
No. 56 Eastfield Drive
Rolling Hills, CA
Zoning Case Number: 433
Dear Mr. Chairman,
By
"B
JUN 2 5 1991
City Of Rolling Hills
Please grant the Levines a one year extension of their
planning approval.
Criss Gunder, on
RESOLUTION NO90-18
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN
REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 433
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Terry Levine
with respect to real property located at 56 Eastfield Drive, Rolling
Hills (Lot 102-SK) requesting site plan review approval for a
proposed residential redevelopment on the property.
Section 2,. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the application on June 19, 1990 and July
17', 1990; and conducted a field site review on June 30, 1990.
Section 3. .'Section 17.34.010 requires a development plan to
be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or
structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration
or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to
grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by
more than twenty-five (25%) percent in any thirty-six (36) month
period.
fact:
Section 4. The Commission makes the following findings of
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General
Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the
proposed structure complies with the General Plan
requirement of low profile, low density residential
development with sufficient open space between surrounding
structures. The project.conforms to Zoning Code setback and
lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot
area of 54,706 square feet. The proposed residential
structure, garage, swimming pool, future stable, and service
yard will have 7,294 square feet which constitutes 13.3% of
the lot, which is within the maximum 20% structural lot
coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including
paved areas and driveway will be 14,371 square feet which
equals 26.2% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum
overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is
similar and compatible with neighboring development
patterns.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into
the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing
natural topographic features of the lot including
surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage
courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). The
proposed development will lower the site a small amount, but
0
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the,
site to minimize grading because all drainage flow from the
site will be channeled into existing drainage courses to the
roadway.
D. The development plan preserves to an extent surrounding
native vegetation on the site and supplements it with
landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural
character of the community.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural
and undeveloped state of the lot be minimizing building
coverage because the construction will not exceed the
building pad coverage policy of 40% because this project
will occupy only 35.5 percent of the proposed building pad.
F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding
residences because as indicated in paragraphs A and E, the
project will have structural lot and building pad coverages
that are less than permitted.
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not
detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for
pedestrians and vehicles because the project will have the
required setbacks from the roadway and easements, and the
present driveway access to the site will be unchanged.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically
exempt fFom environmental review.
Section 5. Based on the foregoing findings, the Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for a proposed
residential project to the property located at 56 Eastfield Drive, as
indicated on the development plan attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and
subject to the following conditions:
A. Any modifications to the project which would constitute
a modification to the Development Plan as approved by the
Planning Commission, shall require the filing of an
application for modification of the Development Plan
pursuant to Section 17.34.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code.
B. A landscaping plan must be,submitted to the City of
Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for approval. The
plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of
the Site Plan Review Ordinance and specifically, shall
maximize the use of drought resistent plants and native
vegetation, especially within the 50 foot front yard
setback. The landscaping plan shall include landscaping to
screen the portion of the driveway near the house and pool
area from visibility from Eastfield Drive.
1990.
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate for the
landscaping plus 15% may be required to be posted and
retained with the City after the City Manager (or the
Landscape Committee of the Community Association, if
appointed to act for this purpose in place of the City
Manager) determines that the landscaping was installed
pursuant to the landscaping as approved, and that
such landscaping is properly established and in good
condition.
C. The proposed building plan must be approved by the
Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review
Committee before any grading or building permit is issued.
D. Prior to the submittal of a final grading plan to the
County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and
drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology
reports that conform to the Development Plan as approved by
the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling
Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and
fill slopes must conform to the City of Rolling Hills
standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio.
E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department
of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to
the Development Plan approved with this Site Plan Review.
F. The access to the stable must be clearly delineated on
the Development Plan. Any required approvals from the
Rolling Hills Community Association allowing access to the
Stable through Association easements must be obtained by the
applicant prior to submitting any drawings from the proposed
residence to the County of Los Angeles for a building
permit.
G. The applicant shall execute an affidavit of acceptance
of all conditions pursuant to 17.32.087 or .this approval
shall not be effective.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of August
Chairman
I hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 90-18 was adopted
at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling
Hills on the 4th day of August, 1990 by the following vote: '
AYES: Commissioners Frost, Lay and Hankins; Chairman
Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Raine
ABSTAIN: None
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 91-18
.A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 90-18
GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 433.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY
FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. A request has been filed by Ms. Teri McCoy Levine
with respect to real property located at 56 Eastfield Drive,
Rolling Hills (Lot 102-SK) requesting a modification to the
condition of approval for a Site Plan Review. The modification
requested is to extend the allowable time period for the
residential reconstruction.
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at its meeting
on August 4, 1990 at which time information was presented
indicating that the extension of time is necessary to expedite the
bidding process and select a contractor.
Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the
Planning Commission does hereby add Paragraph H, Section 5 of
Resolution No. 90-18 to read as follows:
"H. The Site Plan approval shall expire within two years
of the approval of this Resolution."
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of
Resolution No 90-18 shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THIS 13TH DAY OF JULY, 1991.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DIANE SAWYER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 91-18
PAGE 2
The foregoing Resolution No. 91-18 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 90-18
GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 433.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on July 13, 1991 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
***
STAFF REPORT
**** •
DATE: JULY 9, 1990
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: STAFF
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 433; Request for variance to encroach into the
rear yard setback to construct a new residence, and Site Plan
Review for the proposed residence; 56 Eastfield Drive, Lot
102-SK; Owner: Levine
DISCUSSION
The project under application was continued to the June 30 field
inspection from the regular June 19, 1990 Commission meeting. At the
field inspection, it was noted that the proposed residence (6,016 sq. ft.
plus 760 sq. ft. attached garage) will require major grading of 1,100
cubic yards of cut/fill to create a pad, and a variance is requested to
encroach into the rear yard. In addressing the Commission's concerns, the
applicant's design professional presented a revised site plan at the field
meeting. Revisions call for the elimination of the need for the rear yard
variance request.
Issues now to be addressed from the previous meetings are as follows:
1. Adherence to City policy regarding the coverage of the buildable pad
area. ,The alternative design should be further reviewed by the
Commission.
2. Potential impacts of grading to the natural terrain and drainage. A
favorable geological review was presented by the applicant.
3. Landscaping requirements regarding retention and/or replacement of
vegetation.
4. Proposed expansive use of concrete flatwork (Circle driveway, deck).
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission must closely examine the proposed project and
potential impacts in accordance with City requirementsaddressing
development compatibility. In order before site plan review can be
approved, the required findings must be determined. Should the request be
approved, conditions deem appropriate may be attached to the action of the
Commission.
zc433#2
** STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 13, 1990
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
APPLICATION NO.:
SITE LOCATION:
ZONING:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PUBLISHED:
PRIOR CITY ACTIONS:
PROPERTY SIZE/
CONFIGURATION:
PRESENT DEVELOPMENT:
REQUEST:
Zoning Case No. 433
56 Eastfield Drive, Lot 102-SK
RAS-1
Ms. Terry Levine
Doug McHattie, South Bay Engineering; Criss
Gunderson, Architect
June 9, 1990
1.538 acres gross, Irregular shape
Single family residence
A Variance to encroach into the rear yard setback to
construct a new residence, and Site Plan Review for the
proposed residence
REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF ISSUES
In reviewing the applicant's request under Title 17 (Zoning), staff would
identify the following issues for evaluation:
1. The applicant desires variance relief and site plan review to
construct a new 6,016 square foot residence with a 760 square foot
attached garage that will encroach to an extent of 22 feet into the
required rear yard setback as identified by. the City. Said measurement
for the setback is a 50 foot radius from the intersection of the two side
property lines. The project also entails construction of a swimming pool
and new driveway with an on -site circular design for circulation. The
present access point to the site will be utilized.
2. The project calls for grading to an extent of 1,100 cubic yards
of a cut and fill balance in order to prepare the site and create the
building pad. A cross-section has been provided to show the recontouring
of the pad site. The Commission must address the issue of pad coverage,
and taking into account the required setbacks on the lot, the pad is
restricted to a very limited area and coverage will be at a higher
percentage. The proposed project, however, will comply with lot coverage
standards.
3. On -site and perimeter drainage must be addressed as part of the
evaluation of the modification to the natural contours.
4. Landscaping requirements should be addressed regarding retention
and/or replacement of vegetation.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission must closely examine the proposed project and
potential impacts in accordance with the zoning requirements addressing
yard standards and development compatibility. In order before a variance
may be granted and site plan review approved, the appropriate findings
must be determined. The Commission should receive public testimony and
continue the matter to an adjourned meeting so as to inspect the site and
surrounding properties.
zc433rh